Alan Caruba's blog is a daily look at events, personalities, and issues from an independent point of view. Copyright, Alan Caruba, 2015. With attribution, posts may be shared. A permission request is welcome. Email acaruba@aol.com.

Thursday, May 24, 2012

Gay Superheroes? Boycott DC Comics!

By Alan Caruba

I herewith call for a boycott of DC Comics. I draw the line when it comes to gay superheroes.

DC Comics co-publisher, Dan DiDio recently announced that the sexual orientation of an existing superhero would not be changed from heterosexual to homosexual, but that they were “about to introduce a previously existing DC character who was previously straight” as “one of our most prominent gay characters.” This is pure doubletalk.

There is no reason to alter the sexual orientation of any one of DC’s superheroes. For the record, they include Superman, Wonderwoman, Batman and Robin, Supergirl, Batgirl, Aquaman, Cyborg, Green Arrow, Green Lantern, Shazam, the Flash, and Plastic Man.

For my part, I always liked the fact that Superman had the hots for Lois Lane, but harbored some concerns about the relationship of Batman and Robin. I am told that Batwoman made her comic book comeback as a lesbian in 2006. I confess I know little about the other characters because, of course, as a child I spent my time reading Aristotle and Tolstoy. (Not!)

I don’t want a gay superhero of either gender. Deliberately making one of them homosexual serves no purpose other than to spread the gay message that altering all of society to suit their preference for their own sex is okay. It never was. It never will be.

I regard changing our perception of one of the superheroes as a slap in the face of everyone who grew up enjoying their adventures and a form of gay indoctrination for a new, younger generation.

Superman stands for “truth, justice, and the American way.” If he’s gay, then the American way has strayed so far from decency and common sense that it portends the death of our unique political and social experiment. That applies to all the rest of the DC characters as well.

Shame on the rest of us who stand idly by while the President of the United States casually dismisses the ancient and essential element of society—marriage—and the spiritual blessing bestowed on the union of one man and one woman as irrelevant.

According to Wikipedia, “As of April 2011, approximately 3.5% of American adults identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual, while 0.3% are transgender—approximately 11.7 million Americans.” There was a time gays were “in the closet” and being homosexual was best kept private. Now gays parade in the streets, demand their “rights”, and seem to be everywhere in the public culture and media. For a mere 3.5% of the population, they make a lot of noise.

Barack Obama has endorsed same-sex marriage and Mitt Romney does not. This is a major fork in the road for the nation’s voters that want to retain some semblance of sanity.

I concluded long ago that gays have about as much choice over their sexual orientation as being born right or left-handed. I just wish they would not insist that all of society change in order to accept their behavior as “normal.” Normal it’s not.

I do not want homosexuals harmed or harassed. I want them to be ignored. That’s hard to do with relentless campaigns to highlight “bullying” as if only gays were its target or passing out literature in the schools that would make me blush.

This is, simply put, the subversion of a society that began as the result of deeply held religious beliefs that included the sanctity of marriage. It is insidious. It should be resisted.

29 comments:

Except Superman renounced is US citizenship and declared himself a citizen of the world, because the US = evil. Or something. I don't actually follow any of this, but my kids do and my husband used to be really into the comic worlds.

People have long speculated about Batman being gay. The Batman and Superman characters have long been really good friends, so of course people speculated that they were an "item." It seems no one - even fictional characters - cannot maintain a close relationship without bein sexual.

I always thought that anyone who said that they actually read 'War And Peace' was, well, just a little pretentious.

In the late 90's, I was given a copy as a Christmas present by one of my sons. I was on a reading binge, and thank heavens I was, because now I know that there's just so many good books out there.

Anyway, I think the idea behind that particular present was as a bit of a joke on his part.

As it was, I actually did read it. Not only was it a really good novel, but it was a rally great insight into history as well. It was in fact, a 'ripping yarn', a really great read, and I was just so glad that I did read it.

On the strength of that I went out and got hold of Anna Kerenina, which was actually even a better novel.

I was quite surprised really, and now, whenever I hear of someone who has actually read War And Peace, I don't think of their pretentiousness, just the fact that they appreciate good writing.

Contradict yourself much? You say you want "then" ignored then ignore "them". The fact this very post exists defines contradiction. May I also point out they are, as you put it, fictional characters and make believe. That means they carry no real weight in the real world unlike you argued during the first half of your post. Let the consumer decide. If they are okay with it, they will buy the product. If they are not okay with, it they won't. You are not a consumer nor have you been for a very long time. Your opinion has no bearing on the current product DC puts out. If you were, you would know there are 2 lesbians, 1 bisesxual, and 1 long term faithful gay couple. These characters have been around for awhile. You would also know there are the same types of characters in the Marvel publications. In June a gay couple will (gasp) wed! With all due respect, the issues that confront the US have nothing to do with which fictional character is in or out of the closet but jobs, economy, and government spending. Write about those things. Write about how we need to stay focused on Obama's record and educate people on the facts of what the president has failed to do, but don't distract from it with an issue that will not sway the left or the young people of today. This very post fails in those respects

I am wondering why the government is even involved in the marriage issue to begin with. Marriage is between a man and a woman and between them and their god and church. The government need not interfere for any reason other than for tax purposes, recognized property rights and inheritance rights and other similar necessities of a couple.

That being said, since the govt needs to know who is married to who and keeps tabs on these numbers, it too should develop a mechanism for same sex couples as well. NOT MARRIAGE...but a recognized union of two people who choose to live in a similar fashion of husband and wife. One where they can own property together, pay taxes together, inheritance, hospital visitation rights etc. and so on.

As far as calling it a marriage, that is between the same sex couple and their church and their god.

To not allow some form of union for same sex couples would be to deny a remedy or relief to a large and growing portion of Americans who have chosen to live a certain way and want to enjoy the teh same benefits of their union as every other couple does. If they are living together as a couple, than it should only be fair that they get the same advantages as well.

There should be a recoginized union, just don't label it as marriage. Just because someone is gay should not mean they have to pay the government more money in taxes, not be able to have visitation rights in a hospital, pass on property at death, have health care coverage of their loved ones, etc.

Maybe I'm wrong or shortsighted, but surely there must be some rememdy for these 11 plus million people.

Am I wrong? Is there a better solution? I am certainly open to other ideas. But to not give these people any relief will only cause a larger problem.

Chip Bates tells us to ignore homosexuals, but good luck with that. They are in our faces daily with their gayness and now they have possessed the State of California education system with gay indoctrination.California has declared its teachers cannot even stay neutral on this issue; they must advocate homosexuality or be considered intolerant.Even their benign neutrality will not be tolerated by the California left.

"Truth, Justice, and the American Way," huh? Last I checked, the American Way includes, according to the 14th Amendment, equal protection under law. What that means, for the unenelightened, uninitiated, or just plain closed-minded bigoted and stupid, is that every American is equal in the eyes of the law and has the same rights and protections as everyone else. The American Way also includes not discriminating against anyone based on race, creed, color, gender, so why isn't sexual orientation on that list? One's sexual orientation does not make them any less deserving of the rights and privileges of their fellow Americans, and anyone - ANYONE - who believes otherwise is not only prejudiced and bigoted, but is un-American. I am a heterosexual male who believes in the principles of freedom and liberty for which the founding fathers fought and died, and for which our brave soldiers have continued to fight and die over the past two and a half centuries, and anyone who believes in freedom and liberty will agree that the rights that we have as Americans should be enjoyed by ALL Americans equally. Rationalize your bigotry any way you want, but denying any rights to anyone based on nothing more than to whom they are romantically attracted goes completely against the principles of liberty and justice for all upon which this country was founded. 80 years ago, people like you were absolutely convinced that allowing colored people equal rights would destroy society. 60 years ago, people like you were absolutely convinced that allowing interracial marriage would destroy society. When will you people open your eyes and wake up to the fact that all men are created equal? Who are you to decide who gets what rights and who doesn't? There's a word for that. Tyranny. Grow up and move into the 21st century or move to a theocracy like Iran where your bigoted, hate-filled ideas will be welcomed.

I agree with you. From now on I stop to buy all Marvel Comics and burn all my collection including videos, and prohibit my children to watch all marvel superheroes movies, read the comics, and destroy all they own superheroes toys.

@Alex: Your follow-up comment noted that you meant DC Comics, but please do not destroy them. They have real value. If you feel strongly about DC, just sell them off. I agree, however, that I would not want children reading the more recent comics that feature gay superheroes.

Well, What would you expect? Green Lantern will be there next advocate for Same-Sex marriage. I don't know if I will be able to even bring myself to go see another comic book flick. To contribute or aid to there companies is voluntarily contributing to there campaign to influence and corrupt an already very lost generation. I don't think I can anymore. Its really sad IMO. To those of you that stated that this has no effect on our youth you obviously never read comic books. Anytime you read anything you find yourself walking in there steps, connecting in relevant ways, and being able to relate to them in certain situations. This will only get worse before it gets better. "All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to stand by and do nothing" > These are the real villains of our time... You can be a hero by doing something about it.

We really do need to define this properly. The problem we have here is the complete failure of a culture that once knew the difference between right and wrong; a failure orchestrated by social progressives who want nothing more than the destroy individual rights, property rights and capitalism.

In point of fact, I don't care what goes on between animals because has nothing to do with what humans should or should not be doing. The fact that ancient cultures made it a part for their agenda is meaningless also.

The reality is that Judaism was probably the first religion to reject this conduct, followed by its descendan, Christianity, and both were based on the idea that there was a supreme being who determined what was moral and what was immoral. If we accept that premise then we must accept the moral admonitions presented. If we don’t accept them then we have no moral foundation for anything we do, including rejecting all the leftist ideas. We should remember that the binding force in the early 1900's for the progressive movement was religion, called the Social Gospel They believe that socialism was the practical application of Christian ethic.

However, Marx and Engels hated Christianity and the United States for two reasons; both are a confirmations of the rights of individuals; which is anathema to the originators of socialist thinking going back to the French Revolution through Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and those modern socialists who are no longer traitors and spies for the Soviet Union; only because it no longer exists.

That is what socialism is all about; the destruction of Christianity and Judaic/Christian principles in order to make the state the ultimate moral authority. They have worked to do this through a back door by calling this a civil rights issue. This is only part of the package of disingenuous policies promoted by the left. We need to define their goals. Once that is done we can easily see why they promote the things they do.

What animals do is a sign of dominance, not homosexuality. That's ignorance you are spreading. Second some animals eat their young, and guess what my dog eats his crap. I guess we should follow in those foot steps huh? Boy. Marriage has always been presented between A man and woman in Latin America in the mid eastern countries and internationally. Quit fooling yourself. Yes you are right homosexuality was common with the Romans so was pedophilia or pederasty, read your history. Should we follow in those footsteps too? Doesn't change the fact that it's a perversion and abnormal, that's why only 3.5 percent of society is homosexual, a very small percentage.

You are wrong in your comment. The author of the article says he wants homosexuals ignored. All I have said if that is the way the author feels then by all means do so. Why shine a spotlight on something so many of you seem to hate and give it further weight?

This article is complete bullshit. You say 3.5 percent of the population identifies as gay, don't we deserve to identify with the a superior or two. Don't we deserve to have hero's that relate that much more with our own situations. Theres an entire universe of comic book characters and for years, their has never been a gay superhero. As someone who identifies as gay herself, I'm incredibly excited at the idea of a change. This is how the world progresses!

About Me

I am and have been for a long time a writer by profession. I have several books to my credit and my daily column, "Warning Signs", is disseminated on many Internet news and opinion websites, as well as blogs. In addition, I am a longtime book reviewer and have a blog offering a monthly report on new fiction and non-fiction.